Hi Elias (and others)
Just a few comments on some of the points you have mentioned:
>>Use of subclasses for input and output VS Use of predicates isInputOf and isOutputOf
I am aware that this question has caused us much confusion and I have some clarifications on this- A class or a sub-class contain a unique set of Unique Resource Identifier (URIs). All components of an RDF triple (Subject.- Predicate- Object) have URIs. Having subclasses helps users of rdf data to develop better queries (to search the data for what you are looking for).
In other words as Massimo said- “get the answer we want by making the right question”. Ofcourse all the flows (irrespective of input or output) could be bundled under the class Flow but it makes our queries a bit more tedious.
>>How do we make the ontology/database usable for LCA-people if it does not have LCA-specific information in it?
Good question and this is one of my main concern. Although it is clear to us and everyone on board here that BONSAI aims to develop a data merging platform for all areas of industrial ecology (LCA, MFA, IO, etc.). This is the reason to keeping our primary BONSAI ontology minimal.
Now lets say as an LCA research group we are interested in structuring our data in a traditional way (e.g. product, by-product, emission)/ (Impact methods and characterization factors); we can develop a secondary ontology which continues to use BONSAI as the primary ontology and build on top of it. Eg. all my segregations of(product, by-product, emission) can be a sub-class of Bonsai: Flow object.
But we dont want to do this now as adding complexity to the ontology will be a barrier to its uptake among different IE groups.
Thanks again for your comments we will bring some discussion on these issues on our meeting this Friday.